market_news

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only states 'Recent symbol news headlines and links,' which is the output but omits any details about read-only nature, error handling, or data freshness. Since it is a news-fetching tool, the read-only aspect is obvious, but the paucity of behavioral detail is a gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word is meaningful, and there is no redundancy or filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

While the output schema exists to describe return values, the description lacks essential context such as the meaning of the 'limit' parameter and any usage scenarios. The tool is simple, but the description does not fully explain how to invoke it correctly, leaving gaps in parameter coverage and usage guidance.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description implies the 'symbol' parameter through 'symbol news' but does not explain the 'limit' parameter at all. Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate, but it only partially addresses the symbol parameter. The limit is left undocumented in the description, leaving the agent to rely on the schema's default value without context.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the resource (symbol news) and the content (headlines and links), making it distinct from sibling market_* tools like market_bars or market_snapshot. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'list,' instead using a noun phrase, which slightly reduces clarity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any exclusions or prerequisites, such as valid symbol requirements or preferred contexts. The description simply states what the tool returns, leaving the agent to infer usage.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.